Help
As for scared soldiers, in DG he describes the battlefield as being soaked with piss, blood and bile. That should be clear enough, no?
And as for sex, I recall we used to have a rather lengthy discussion about that in the Phoenix Inn a year or so ago. Maybe two years. I think SE does really well. It's what he doesn't say that matters, as in 'Tonight I'll ride you, old man', when Duikers lover joined the fray. I mean, it's not as if we'd want an elaborate description of how they met, what they said ... it seems as if the soldiers attitude toward sex is pragmatic, as with most things. Get it whenever you can, but don't waste too many words on it.
Criticism of Malazan Book of the Fallen
#222
stone monkey 
- I'm the baddest man alive and I don't plan to die...
-
- Group: (COPPA) Users Awaiting Moderatio
- Posts: 2,369
- Joined: 28-July 03
- Location:The Rainy City
Posted 17 August 2005 - 12:08 PM
People don't swear properly - this is a failing in a lot of genre fantasy. There's a kind of medieval attitude to cursing. "By such-and-such" and the like. Some would argue this adds atmosphere. To me this is at the expense of realism; which has a distancing effect from the characters and the situations they find themselves in. Although as we're talking fantasy fiction, realism is hardly a primary concern. I suppose.
Now presumably this is an editorial decision, 'cause if the Malaz soldiers spoke to each other like the real soldiers of my acquintance they'd be calling each other "daft ****s" all the time and quite a few people of a delicate disposition might be put off reading the books. To my mind the only fantasy authors using realistically gritty/colourful language in their work are China Mieville and GRRM.
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
Now presumably this is an editorial decision, 'cause if the Malaz soldiers spoke to each other like the real soldiers of my acquintance they'd be calling each other "daft ****s" all the time and quite a few people of a delicate disposition might be put off reading the books. To my mind the only fantasy authors using realistically gritty/colourful language in their work are China Mieville and GRRM.
Anyone else have an opinion on this?
If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do. If some one maintains that two and two are five, or that Iceland is on the equator, you feel pity rather than anger, unless you know so little of arithmetic or geography that his opinion shakes your own contrary conviction. … So whenever you find yourself getting angry about a difference of opinion, be on your guard; you will probably find, on examination, that your belief is going beyond what the evidence warrants. Bertrand Russell
#223
Cause
- Elder God
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 5,821
- Joined: 25-December 03
- Location:NYC
Posted 17 August 2005 - 03:32 PM
I like the way se uses swear words. hoods breath etc. Its cool and it seems normal for them to use the god of death to curse everything. Also it seems slightly odd when a world diffrent to our own uses swear words from our own like f***.
#224
stone monkey
- I'm the baddest man alive and I don't plan to die...
-
- Group: (COPPA) Users Awaiting Moderatio
- Posts: 2,369
- Joined: 28-July 03
- Location:The Rainy City
Posted 24 August 2005 - 04:27 PM
That's interesting, because one jarring moment for me came in GotM when a character said "Okay"; totally burst the suspension of disbelief bubble for me that did....
If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do. If some one maintains that two and two are five, or that Iceland is on the equator, you feel pity rather than anger, unless you know so little of arithmetic or geography that his opinion shakes your own contrary conviction. … So whenever you find yourself getting angry about a difference of opinion, be on your guard; you will probably find, on examination, that your belief is going beyond what the evidence warrants. Bertrand Russell
#225 Guest_Antenociti_*
Posted 07 September 2005 - 12:27 AM
Quote
what aspects or parts of the books or SE's writing don't you like
His characterisations of the army "type" are getting tired and thin. The whole concept of the "vets" and the "marines" being such a powerful and brilliant force are too often undermined by his very own situations (10,000 hardened thinking soldiers laying down their weapons to be crucified springs instantly to mind).
The cliché of "incompetence at the top" (Gallipoli complex anyone?) and a whole raft of other tired old repetitious clichés of army life, morale boosting of recruits by hardened vets creating instant upper-warriors, the “cult†of the NCO and so forth... little of it rings true first time around and it only gets worse when it is repeated at every opportunity. It’s as though it’s been written by somebody who has been told of army life by a member of the TA mixed with a backdrop of Hollywood war films as the only reference points. ( Glenn Cook didn’t do it that well either but it wasn’t this bad.)
Timelines: no such thing in SE & ICE writing it seems, dates and times are nothing more than convenient amendments to chapter header quotes.
Anthropology, evolution and ecology: staggering to understand but the use and grasp of both subjects appear to range from childlike to entirely ignorant. Maybe it was dumbed down for the “retarded audience†but it’s a lot shallower than the latest sea in the Holy Desert.
Perpetual need to write “anti-fantasyâ€: There are so many occasions where the story and characters are deliberately turned into anti-fantasy devices it has become not only annoying but detrimental to the quality of the story and world.
When writing a fantasy novel upon the basis of disliking the “tired old fantasy†of yesteryear if does not mean that the book has to run and scream its devotion for the opposite end of every device, character plot and idea. (Especially when many of those are not substantially different other than at the most superficial of levels)
Other than that – not too bad
#226
Roland
- High Fist
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 444
- Joined: 16-September 05
Posted 16 September 2005 - 09:05 AM
What I don't like (and I'm sorry if anyone said that before me but I didn't really have the time to read the whole topic) in the grizzled veteran type that many people here are talking about is not its presence but its resamblence to Sam Vimes (Pratchett, Discworld). I mean... Erikson DOES write like Pratchett some times, for example some exerpts from GoTM and the humorous parts of MT, but... Dunno, for me the Vimes type is good only for... well, Vimes. And when you have half an army consisted of sarcastic-cynic-philosophizing-little-sad-but-doing-what-must-be-done-and-oh-so-knowing-of-life Samuel Vimeses... it just sucks.
The other thing that bothers me is the power level someone mentioned in the beginning of the topic. I mean, a Jaghut is EITHER one-man-army Raest, or the pathetic creature from the prologue of MoI. Even considering the power level differens betwen an ordinary Jaghut and a Tyrant, it is still ridiculous.
The other thing that bothers me is the power level someone mentioned in the beginning of the topic. I mean, a Jaghut is EITHER one-man-army Raest, or the pathetic creature from the prologue of MoI. Even considering the power level differens betwen an ordinary Jaghut and a Tyrant, it is still ridiculous.
#227
Omras Ghum
- Fist
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 212
- Joined: 04-September 05
Posted 16 September 2005 - 10:00 AM
tha jaghut are a pacifist people, aren't they? and they fought when they had to but what would a jaghut do if he/she sees no more chance of winning? perhaps some just gave in and let themselves be killed although they would have been able to kill a lot more imass before they finally would have gotten them anyways - so the jaghut decided if their own death was inevitable they at least wouldn't kill more of the imass so as to avoid more deaths... does this make sense?
#228 Guest_The Silent One_*
Posted 16 September 2005 - 12:40 PM
The only thing that bothers me about the books is the wait to see whats happening with the other characters whilst your reading a new book with new characters but its not really something that bothers me because i like findin out about the new ones
#229
Roland
- High Fist
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 444
- Joined: 16-September 05
Posted 16 September 2005 - 08:39 PM
Omras Ghum said:
tha jaghut are a pacifist people, aren't they? and they fought when they had to but what would a jaghut do if he/she sees no more chance of winning? perhaps some just gave in and let themselves be killed although they would have been able to kill a lot more imass before they finally would have gotten them anyways - so the jaghut decided if their own death was inevitable they at least wouldn't kill more of the imass so as to avoid more deaths... does this make sense?
Well of course it does, but to me it's a bit far-fetched
I just don't think it was the case with the mother from the MoI prologue. She was desperate and she had her two children to care for so it was deffinitely not a give-up. She just coudn't put up a fight. Against a pathetic bunch of Imass!
#230 Guest_Killanthir_*
Posted 16 September 2005 - 09:10 PM
Regarding the oft-mentioned critisicism against the "grizzled veteran" characters:
I would think that if you took a sampling of soldiers from any prolonged military campaign (say, Vietnam war) you'd find many who were cynical and sarcastic. I would think they'd be asking questions along the lines of, "We put our lives on the line day in, day out, and for what? What's the point?" You'd probably find more than a few suspicious of their superiors' motives/intentions.
What else would you expect from veteran soldiers?
I also don't equate this to "philosphising". Its not like they're writing a metaphysical treatise on life (for that read "The Prince of Nothing" series ). They're just asking basic questions anyone would ask in their situation, like "WTF am I doing here?!" 
I would think that if you took a sampling of soldiers from any prolonged military campaign (say, Vietnam war) you'd find many who were cynical and sarcastic. I would think they'd be asking questions along the lines of, "We put our lives on the line day in, day out, and for what? What's the point?" You'd probably find more than a few suspicious of their superiors' motives/intentions.
What else would you expect from veteran soldiers?
I also don't equate this to "philosphising". Its not like they're writing a metaphysical treatise on life (for that read "The Prince of Nothing" series
). They're just asking basic questions anyone would ask in their situation, like "WTF am I doing here?!"
#231
Roland
- High Fist
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 444
- Joined: 16-September 05
Posted 16 September 2005 - 09:39 PM
Killanthir said:
Regarding the oft-mentioned critisicism against the "grizzled veteran" characters:
I would think that if you took a sampling of soldiers from any prolonged military campaign (say, Vietnam war) you'd find many who were cynical and sarcastic. I would think they'd be asking questions along the lines of, "We put our lives on the line day in, day out, and for what? What's the point?" You'd probably find more than a few suspicious of their superiors' motives/intentions.
What else would you expect from veteran soldiers?
I would think that if you took a sampling of soldiers from any prolonged military campaign (say, Vietnam war) you'd find many who were cynical and sarcastic. I would think they'd be asking questions along the lines of, "We put our lives on the line day in, day out, and for what? What's the point?" You'd probably find more than a few suspicious of their superiors' motives/intentions.
What else would you expect from veteran soldiers?
Weeeeell, for me the REAL veteran soldier is one, who is scarred for life and will probably NEVER stay in the army or even TALK about war. Those "grizzled veterans" of Erikson's... they're just too enthusiastic to acually talk, to explain, and, down the line, fight. And this is NOT what I'd expect from a veteran soldier. And if it WON'T be realistic, it might as well also NOT be Vimes, ok?
#232
polishgenius
- Heart of Courage
-
- Group: LHTEC
- Posts: 5,256
- Joined: 16-June 05
Posted 23 September 2005 - 11:04 AM
I can kind of see where you're coming from with the soldiers, but they're not all that similiar to Vimes. The main difference, of course, being that Vimes could never be a soldier, he doesn't kill unless he absolutely has to, and being a soldier would put him in that situation too often.
I agree that there might be too many of the whole 'grizzled, been there, done that, picked up a dark sense of humour along the way' type, but bear in mind that this story does focus on the extraordinary elements of the world. For example, Mappo thinks that Fiddler is "a wonder in his own right", and he's comparing him to Icarium there.
My main problem is that the huge complexity of the world has led to a fuzziness around the edges - minor, and very rarely possibly major, inconsistencies in the narrative. And, of course, telling what's a GotMism and what's not.
I agree that there might be too many of the whole 'grizzled, been there, done that, picked up a dark sense of humour along the way' type, but bear in mind that this story does focus on the extraordinary elements of the world. For example, Mappo thinks that Fiddler is "a wonder in his own right", and he's comparing him to Icarium there.
My main problem is that the huge complexity of the world has led to a fuzziness around the edges - minor, and very rarely possibly major, inconsistencies in the narrative. And, of course, telling what's a GotMism and what's not.
I can't carry it for you, but I can carry you.
#233
Tiste Simeon
- Faith, Heavy Metal & Bacon
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 12,143
- Joined: 08-October 04
- Location:T'North
Posted 29 September 2005 - 12:48 PM
Roland said:
What I don't like (and I'm sorry if anyone said that before me but I didn't really have the time to read the whole topic) in the grizzled veteran type that many people here are talking about is not its presence but its resamblence to Sam Vimes (Pratchett, Discworld). I mean... Erikson DOES write like Pratchett some times, for example some exerpts from GoTM and the humorous parts of MT, but... Dunno, for me the Vimes type is good only for... well, Vimes. And when you have half an army consisted of sarcastic-cynic-philosophizing-little-sad-but-doing-what-must-be-done-and-oh-so-knowing-of-life Samuel Vimeses... it just sucks.
Quote
The other thing that bothers me is the power level someone mentioned in the beginning of the topic. I mean, a Jaghut is EITHER one-man-army Raest, or the pathetic creature from the prologue of MoI. Even considering the power level differens betwen an ordinary Jaghut and a Tyrant, it is still ridiculous.
Though most Jaghut have considerable power. The mother at the beginning of MOI was probably a very powerful jhag, but she knew what she was up against, and was looking for a way to save her children. She could have fought, and probably taken down a load of the T'lan Imass with her, but she wanted her children to live. (A mistake, in retrospect.
) Plus, Pran Chole was pretty tough and powerful, she probably felt his power, and knew it was hopeless... Now if Raest was there with her, then it would have got interesting...
A Haunting Poem
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
#234
Roland
- High Fist
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 444
- Joined: 16-September 05
Posted 29 September 2005 - 01:10 PM
Quote
Wha...??? Pratchett/Erikson??? You can make such a comparison. *shakes head* for shame sir, for shame. Erikson is far above and beyond anything Pratchett has done...
To each his own
They are too different to compare in matters of quality and I love both of them in a very different way.
#235
Tiste Simeon
- Faith, Heavy Metal & Bacon
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 12,143
- Joined: 08-October 04
- Location:T'North
Posted 29 September 2005 - 01:33 PM
But... Erikson is better, right? *tears well up*
A Haunting Poem
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
Just different
#237
Tiste Simeon
- Faith, Heavy Metal & Bacon
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 12,143
- Joined: 08-October 04
- Location:T'North
Posted 30 September 2005 - 12:45 PM
Not closed... you haven't heard the last of this Roland! *shakes fist in threatening manner* I'll be back, you wait! *waves "Erikson for Ever" banner as he walks away humming the canadian national anthem*
A Haunting Poem
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
#238 Guest_Fool_*
Posted 02 October 2005 - 10:51 AM
Quote
Weeeeell, for me the REAL veteran soldier is one, who is scarred for life and will probably NEVER stay in the army or even TALK about war. Those "grizzled veterans" of Erikson's... they're just too enthusiastic to acually talk, to explain, and, down the line, fight. And this is NOT what I'd expect from a veteran soldier. And if it WON'T be realistic, it might as well also NOT be Vimes, ok.
I REALLY dont see how youre making the connection with vimes specifically. These grizzled veteran characters exist in so many books and their roots are most likely in the black company series and in vietnam war literature (though of course there they usually arent as gung ho).
And i would rate pratchett over erikson.
#240 Guest_Fool_*
Posted 02 October 2005 - 12:03 PM
Uhm, erikson pretty much admitted that the bridgeburners stem from the black company/short-timers/vietnam war in general.
I dont see how they are any more sophisticated than the black company for that matter. In fact croaker & co. have considerably more depth than some of the bridgeburners if you ask me.
So? Which parallels? Taking erikson for an offshoot from pratchett is one of the stranger theories i've heard.
I dont see how they are any more sophisticated than the black company for that matter. In fact croaker & co. have considerably more depth than some of the bridgeburners if you ask me.
Quote
And besides, there are other paralels betwen Erikson and Pratchett so...
So? Which parallels? Taking erikson for an offshoot from pratchett is one of the stranger theories i've heard.
